Changes in health-care provision have led to cancer patients being offered oral chemotherapy in the community. Three levels of oral chemotherapy services have been proposed (levels 1, 2 and 3) with community pharmacies playing differing roles within them. This study aims to explore health-care professionals' views on oral chemotherapy services being delivered by community pharmacies and to gain insights into the barriers, facilitators and training/knowledge needs of community pharmacists with respect to providing them.
Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of three chemotherapy nurses, five oncology pharmacists and five community pharmacists. Data were analysed thematically using Framework Analysis.
Findings for level 1 and 2 services included uncertainty on community pharmacists' professional responsibilities, the expertise of GPs in prescribing oral chemotherapy and the training and competency of community pharmacists. The lack of patient information, care and support provision was emphasised for all the models. Although level 1 was achievable in current practice, level 2 was considered the safest option, while level 3 was ideal but risky option. For all levels, training and education for community pharmacists and inter-professional issues were facilitators to oral chemotherapy services. The service environment, dispensing process-related constraints (access to blood test results and protocols) were significant barriers for levels 2 and 3. Advanced communication skills, patient education and counselling were identified as key areas for education and training for community pharmacists.
The study suggests there are significant concerns and challenges associated with community pharmacies implementing any of the proposed levels of oral chemotherapy services. Educational and training opportunities for community pharmacists and the careful development of safe infrastructures will be essential in the future planning and implementation of any community pharmacy oral chemotherapy service.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
14
14%
Nursing and Health Professions
13
13%
Social Sciences
4
4%
Engineering
3
3%
Other
8
8%
Unknown
42
42%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,727,496
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
#465
of 649 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,314
of 390,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 649 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,534 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
